Although I'm from Denmark I wrote that guy.Censureship just pisses me off no end.. And I wouldnt be surprised if my crazy-ass government decided it was a great idear.Those guys could learn a lot from gamedesigners about creating optimal conditions, incentive- and reward-systems instead of inventing wierd laws that are easily bypassed and misses their targeted audience.

First of all, right as always. One of the reasons I prefer PC gaming is it almost always has a quicksave and quickload function.

MowDownJoe:Y'know, just from reading all the idiotic things Atkinson has said, I'm half-tempted to send him an e-mail now and rub his own stupidity in his face from half a world away. Of course, I don't know how well that'd go over.

Do it. Seriously. I shall be doing it for days after my family leaves. Though it may be wise to create a new email account. It's not hard, and I have enough spam in this one as is. Please. I have a more personal stake in this though. I'm in Australia...

yzzlthtz:Hmmm...there are kind of 3 yes, you're right, but only a given 2 of these are necessarily relevant to progressing to the boss, so I counted 2.

Ahh, but backtracking is involved, especially if you want to loot the Dragon Roost at higher levels. So all three count.

Also, 2-2 and 5-1 have quite a few shortcuts that allow one to avoid most of the stage, even on the first playthrough, without having to unlock anything. 4-1 has that too, but I'm 90% sure it's unintentional...

theultimateend:I love the use of caps. Good way to point out that you haven't the slightest clue why you are upset. Generally speaking when you scream in a discussion you aren't worth discussing with.

But I'll point it out regardless. Did I ever say I was talking about the game? Did I mention that my point was literally carbon copy of how this particular game played out?

No infact I was just pointing out how your point doesn't always validate the issue. Sure it IS someone's fault if they die in a game but that doesn't get the game off the hook.

But going into that point further would be a waste of my time. When you learn to grow up and figure out how formatting works better than caps lock (or held shift) get back to me.

Well, it's good to see that some people understand the difference between a hard game and one that just takes the micky. I've seen way too many prefect or near prefect reviews for Demon's souls, so I'm grateful for this and the flash review for showing people what common sense is.

Hallowed Lady:Well, it's good to see that some people understand the difference between a hard game and one that just takes the micky. I've seen way too many prefect or near prefect reviews for Demon's souls, so I'm grateful for this and the flash review for showing people what common sense is.

Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Sewblon:Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Possibly because dragon age is upwards of 3 lifetimes long, but yes I understand what you mean and agree with you.

Demon's Souls is not hard. It is harder than most contemporary titles, but 5 hours into it I am not feeling challenged, intellectually or physically.

What it is is soul-crushingly boring. Combat is plodding and unengaging. My character's moveset is small and shallow. Enemies are diverse, but defeating individuals boils down to memorizing their few near-identical attacks. 90% of combat is spent herding crowds of enemies, or waiting for some armored dipshit to finally swing so I can counterattack. The game hails from the "brown" school of realism and features very little music -- ostensibly to heighten tension, but in reality because what little music there is is embarrassing.

When I die (which is not nearly as often as has been claimed), I feel zero impetus to retrace my steps; not out of frustration, but because they were only marginally entertaining the first time, and don't bear repeating. I have returned to this title over and over, trying to understand all the good things people are saying about it, and I just don't see them. It has terrible gameplay and terrible production values. The poor checkpointing isn't a dealbreaker, but it's one example of a broader lack of effort in the game as a whole, which is really what kills it for me.

I understand the game takes some work to get into, but I feel 5 hours in I should at least see the payoff, and so far it hasn't materialized. I'm not sure how much longer I'm supposed to play before it suddenly becomes deep and engaging, but I just don't have it in me to trudge any further.

Sewblon:Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Sewblon:Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Sewblon:Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Because he didn't give the game a fair chance.

There's a difference.

What is a "fair chance?"

Taking the time to understand the complex fighting system as well as adjust to the learning curve.

Though, he doesn't have that kind of time. I am not really saying that he should have given the game a fair chance but rather saying that his fans should give it a fair chance.

Sewblon:Am I the only person who doesn't understand why when Yahtzee didn't finish Dragon Age most people didn't complain, but now that he didn't finish Demon's Souls allot of people think it ruins his credibility as a reviewer and a gamer?

Because he didn't give the game a fair chance.

There's a difference.

What is a "fair chance?"

Taking the time to understand the complex fighting system as well as adjust to the learning curve.

Though, he doesn't have that kind of time. I am not really saying that he should have given the game a fair chance but rather saying that his fans should give it a fair chance.

So you are saying that his fans should disregard his assessment because he is incapable of playing this game correctly? What exactly makes you think that his fans would be more likely to give this game a "fair chance" if they played it themselves?

Sewblon: So you are saying that his fans should disregard his assessment because he is incapable of playing this game correctly? What exactly makes you think that his fans would be more likely to give this game a "fair chance" if they played it themselves?

Sewblon: So you are saying that his fans should disregard his assessment because he is incapable of playing this game correctly? What exactly makes you think that his fans would be more likely to give this game a "fair chance" if they played it themselves?

Easy, because it is a really good game!...

Okay, seriously though. His fans have a lot more time than he does.

Doesn't his honest opinion being invalid defeat the purpose of him reviewing the game? They wouldn't be his fans if they didn't share some of the opinions he expressed. I think you are assuming a level of patience that doesn't exist.

Sewblon: Doesn't his honest opinion being invalid defeat the purpose of him reviewing the game? They wouldn't be his fans if they didn't share some of the opinions he expressed. I think you are assuming a level of patience that doesn't exist.

And here I was under the impression that he makes these reviews for the sake of comedy.

Sewblon: Doesn't his honest opinion being invalid defeat the purpose of him reviewing the game? They wouldn't be his fans if they didn't share some of the opinions he expressed. I think you are assuming a level of patience that doesn't exist.

And here I was under the impression that he makes these reviews for the sake of comedy.

If he doesn't believe the things he says on those videos, or in these articles, remind me to never play poker with him. Game reviewing was never an exact science so Yahtzee isn't necessarily any less credible than any other game journalist that I know of.

While being a fan of Demon's Souls, I can't help but say that all these hate against Yahtzee is just... wrong, and unjustified.

So what if he doesn't get the game? So what if he's not playing it right? I can understand for someone who's on a tight schedule, this game can get tedious and one would not have the patience to truly enjoy and see the game for what it is. That's not his fault, that's just how it is, and it's disappointing.

What I will say is, he's not playing the game right. The game is not even THAT hard, you just need to learn from your mistakes. It's not a game designed to kill your character. It's a game designed to VALUE your characters life, something you don't do in normal games.

Take Uncharted 2 for example. I would do alot of things to Nathan Drake that could get him killed, e.g. running blindly into gunfires or experimenting with a cliff, falling off. But his death would have no impact on my being.

Demon's Souls however, I have come to learn that you can't play the game like that. Once you die, all your unspent progress dies with you on your second death. You learn to be cautious in approaching this creepy, yet atmospheric world. You learn to choose when to strike, and when to take on the defense as if your life depends on it. The adrenaline rush that you get when a black phantom invades your world is a rush like no other. No other games have given me that kind of gut-retching feeling when my character dies with 70000 souls, and the immersion of exploring an unknown area filled with demons, with dangers lurking over any turns is just fantastic. It keeps you at the edge of your seat fearing for your (character's) life.

However I do have to clarify, like others have said, that Yahtzee has not been conveying the right message:

- The game is not cheap - you learn from every death, and all deaths are avoidable unless you're careless, or just not up to par with your level/equipment (like all RPGs).- The game does not waste your time - YOU waste your own time if you keep dying from the same mistake, without the initiative to learn WHY you're dead. And even if you DO die, you still get a second chance to regain your loss.- The game is not difficult - it is HARDER than most games; but with an attentive mind, you'll find that the game merely challenges your intellect, not your gaming skill.- The game is not out to GET you - there are all sorts of signs and hints regarding the dangers around you. Chances are, if there isn't any, the previous victims would have left you a clue in the form of bloodstain or message.- And finally - you're a one man army against a world filled with Demons. You're supposed to feel like your life is in danger and threatened at every turn. If you just play games to pass time and is not into the experience, then this game is not for you.

In closing, I'm just disappointed Yahtzee didn't get to see the game for what it is. We really have no right to get angry at Yahtzee just because he doesn't get it (Although he did spread a few false information about the game). Yahtzee, I heartily suggest that at your own leisure, take your time with this game and try it again with a more attentive mind. It is not the game that keep killing you, but your lack of willingness to discover your downfall. If you don't have time, then by all means, please just forget about it.

Demon's Souls has really changed how I see video games as an entertainment medium. Sure, many games are fun and memorable, but Demon's Souls... the connection you have with the game is ecstatic - it's a virtual horror experience, starring you.

Etheo:While being a fan of Demon's Souls, I can't help but say that all these hate against Yahtzee is just... wrong, and unjustified.

So what if he doesn't get the game? So what if he's not playing it right? I can understand for someone who's on a tight schedule, this game can get tedious and one would not have the patience to truly enjoy and see the game for what it is. That's not his fault, that's just how it is, and it's disappointing.

I understand Yahtzee not playing it to the full extent. But my scorn extends to the people who say it is a bad game for it despite not owning it. If there is one game that I would want to make a lot money this generation, it is this one. I want there to be a sequel for this. As well as providing a model example of how to make challenging difficulty for future gaming.

Hallowed Lady:Well, it's good to see that some people understand the difference between a hard game and one that just takes the micky. I've seen way too many prefect or near prefect reviews for Demon's souls, so I'm grateful for this and the flash review for showing people what common sense is.

Take your own advice and understand this for yourself.

Sadly I have not got a PS3, so I cannot play this game, but my basic point was that sometimes developers don't understand the line between a hard game and something that is just annoying. I mean I've played some really annoying games in my time and found myself qutting them because it just gets too much.

I've tried it whilst round a friend's house and found myself just shaking my head muttering something along the lines of 'no, I'm not going through that entire section again just because the makers didn't want to put decently spaced save points in!'.

That the main issue I have with any game like Demon's souls. It's all well and good to make a hard game, but make it fair when you know that many players will die tons of times. Don't make them had to repeat sections over and over again. Perhaps make the game pause when the player enters the menu, because not doing it is just a completely evil move.

A game can be hard, but as stated before make it fair, make it something that doesn't make people seeth in sheer rage and glare daggers at the screen.

Hmm is the difficulty in the game like in mario (3); where if you die at bowser you would have to re-doo the castle, or would it be more like you'd have to do all the levels up to the castle again?

Also difficulty with just editing the health bars of monsters aren't really fix to much. if it's an monster that's easy to beat can take alot of hits and little strategy it just becomes boring..

When i think about it mario games implemented a mid lvl checkpoint later on.. a games not hard because you have to run for 30 mins to get to the point where you died last 'cause that's the hard part of the map..

Hallowed Lady:Well, it's good to see that some people understand the difference between a hard game and one that just takes the micky. I've seen way too many prefect or near prefect reviews for Demon's souls, so I'm grateful for this and the flash review for showing people what common sense is.

Take your own advice and understand this for yourself.

Sadly I have not got a PS3, so I cannot play this game, but my basic point was that sometimes developers don't understand the line between a hard game and something that is just annoying. I mean I've played some really annoying games in my time and found myself qutting them because it just gets too much.

I've tried it whilst round a friend's house and found myself just shaking my head muttering something along the lines of 'no, I'm not going through that entire section again just because the makers didn't want to put decently spaced save points in!'.

That the main issue I have with any game like Demon's souls. It's all well and good to make a hard game, but make it fair when you know that many players will die tons of times. Don't make them had to repeat sections over and over again. Perhaps make the game pause when the player enters the menu, because not doing it is just a completely evil move.

A game can be hard, but as stated before make it fair, make it something that doesn't make people seeth in sheer rage and glare daggers at the screen.

That's the beauty of it though. Dying doesn't make me think ''Damn it, that was unfair! Now I have to start all over because of that!'' Instead, dying makes me think ''Damn it...I should have done this. Oh well, retry!''

None of the levels are really all that long. And the ones that are long have shortcuts you can activate. Like the Boletarian Palace and Latria Tower.

A good counter-example is a game like NetHack (Or any roguelike really), where when you die you start the entire game over. As in all progress made erased, saves deleted. But it's not frustrating, because you learn from your mistakes, you get better, and most importantly, the game is randomly generated, so you don't have to trudge through the exact same crap you just did - every level is always going to be different, so restarting means a totally different game.

A game like I Wanna Be the Guy works because even when it cheapshots you, you really don't lose that much progress - you might spend half an hour trying to clear a single obstacle, but you'll have died and restarted possibly hundreds of times during that period, so really you've just been working on the same 10-15 second section dozens upon dozens of times. It sounds frustrating, but it really isn't because you never really feel like you're actually repeating tedious content - if you absolutely can't clear it, you can just quit and come back later and you'll still be more or less in the same spot, rather than having to clear through a half hour slog of boring stuff to get to that one hard part.